[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions

To: Erik Rauch <erikr@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Subject: Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions
From: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Date: Tue, 25 May 1993 10:30:02 -0400
In-Reply-To: <9305251227.AA13236@relay1.UU.NET> from "Iain Alexander" at May 25, 93 01:25:29 pm
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>

Iain Alexander quotes me:

> > Names are still just ...C<pause>, with no impermissible medial consonant
> > pairs.

and apparently reads this as meaning that no medial consonant pairs are
impermissible.  What I meant was that medial consonant pairs which are
impermissible (by the usual rules) are not allowed in names either.
Thus "*djeimz" = James and "*bradfrd" = Bradford are forbidden.  This is
a fairly new restriction.

--
John Cowan      cowan@snark.thyrsus.com         ...!uunet!lock60!snark!cowan
                        e'osai ko sarji la lojban.

Prev by Date: Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions
Next by Date: how to say
Prev by thread: Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions
Next by thread: Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread